Agenda item

Erection of 60no. bed care home (Use Class C2) with associated parking, landscaping and access following the demolition of existing buildings and the creation of new sports pitches for use by York Sports Club [Rawcliffe and Clifton Without Ward]

Cllr Melly declared that she was a Ward Councillor for Clifton with Rawcliffe and a Member of Clifton Parish Council and had not taken part in any decision making regarding Limetrees.

 

Members considered a major full application from Mr Garton, Ms Stubbs and Mr Elliot for the erection of a 60no. bed care home (Use Class C2) with associated parking, landscaping and access following the demolition of existing buildings and the creation of new sports pitches for use by York Sports Club at Limetrees, 31 Shipton Road, Clifton, York.

 

The Head of Planning and Development Services gave a

 

Add info

Additional Representations

 

Two additional representations have been received.

 

Occupier of 5 Fairway, York who state that they support the idea of a care home, but the public right of way changes the status of the current boundary hedge between the site and the footpath.  They request that the planning authority apply a hedgerow retention order to the boundary hedge between the site and the footpath (northeast boundary).

 

CYC Ecologist response:

The Council’s Ecologist has verbally advised that the hedgerow has been surveyed by the Applicant’s Ecologist and the hedgerow was assessed to be species poor.  It would not meet the criteria under the hedgerow regulations to be deemed an ‘important hedgerow’ suitable for protection under this regime.  Additionally, the hedgerow is included within the ecological management plan which outlines measures for its retention, protection and enhancement.  

 

Sport England maintains its objection as a non statutory consultee. The outstanding matters relate to ball strike; the new playing field is likely to be at risk of ball strike from the existing cricket ground and does not demonstrate how users of the new playing field will be protected.

 

Sport England has suggested that it will review its objection as a non statutory consultee if the applicant can provide the following:

1. the applicant undertake a ball strike risk assessment to consider the issues of ball strike from existing cricket pitches to the new playing field and examine any mitigation required.

2. Alternatively, the applicant could propose a planning condition that sets out that the new area of playing field will not be in use for sport when cricket is being played. 

3. if the application does not wish to address the issue of ball strike, they should provide further information setting out why this is the case having regard to paragraph 193 of the NPPF.

 

Applicants’ response: The applicant has reviewed Sport England’s latest comment and clarified that LaboSport are a competent company and have undertaken a ball strike assessment. They are concerned that Cricket England may not have read the report. They state that LaboSport’s graph show that ball strikes from the cricket first team pitch can reach 65m in length, however the new playing fields are 69.5m, thus being outside of the ball strike area and the ball will hit the ground before going onto the new playing fields. The Sports Club are a competent community club which would understand risks associated with endangering any club members/family members with potential risk such as this and would manage the use of their grounds accordingly.

 

Officer response: The Applicant submitted a Cricket and Ball Strike Assessment (Ref: LSUK.23-0616_CBA V1 dated 11.09.2023 by Labosport Ltd).  This report assesses the potential risk of cricket balls and rugby balls surpassing the boundaries of the York Sports Club.

 

Focussing on the risk from ball strike from the first team cricket pitch, in a northern direction to the additional playing fields, the shortest measured boundary from the closest stump is circa 68.68m. The report outlines that the overall mitigation height recommendation is 0m high. The report concludes that based on the analysis there is no need for any mitigation to protect against cricket balls around the proposed site.  Officers therefore consider that there would be no issue of ball strike from the existing cricket pitch to the new playing field and there is no requirement for any mitigation.  Therefore the objection maintained by Sport England (as a non-statutory consultee) in this regard is given limited weight in the assessment of the application.

 

Update on report

 

Additional section following on from para. 5.126: 

 

Public Sector Equality Duty

 

5.127  The proposals will provide an improved vehicular and pedestrian access within the site, provide accessible parking, along with level access and where required, ramped access as well as lifts within the building.  The building and its environs have been designed with elderly and disabled persons in mind. Age and disability are a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010.  (The other protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 are gender reassignment, marriage or civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation and should not be wholly disregarded).

 

5.128  Under Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 a public authority must in the exercise of its functions have “due regard” to the need to eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other prohibited conduct; advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it and foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it. This is known as the Public Sector Equality Duty (“PSED”).

 

5.129  Having due regard to the need to advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it involves having due regard, in particular, to the need to:

 

a) remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic;

b) take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it;

c) encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low

 

5.130  The PSED does not specify a particular substantive outcome but requires the LPA to ensure that the decision made has been taken with “due regard” to its equality implications.

 

5.131  Officers have given due regard to the equality implications of the proposals in making its recommendation.  The issues with regard thereto are noted above in relation to this application but do not raise any matters that would outweigh the material planning considerations.

 

Additional plans/information submitted

 

The Applicant has submitted further plans/information including:

 

- Archaeological Evaluation by Trail Trenching and Earthwork Survey Ref: 05-02-23 by MAP Archaeological Practice

 

- Final landscaping scheme

          - Landscape Masterplan 101 Rev D

- 201 Rev C (planting plan 1 of 2)

- 202 Rev C (planting plan 2 of 2)

 

These have been assessed by statutory consultees, where relevant and their response provided below:

 

Council’s Archaeologist – confirms that the submitted archaeological evaluation and topographic survey which has recently taken place at the application site is acceptable. Given the results of the investigation, and the negative results of other sites in the immediate vicinity on this side of Shipton Road, I do not wish to ask for any further mitigation to take place.  The suggested condition (no. 13) has now been complied with and no further archaeological conditions are required.

 

Officer response: Given the result of the investigation andthat the requirements of the previously suggested condition have now been complied with;Condition 13 is recommended to be removed in its entirety. 

 

Council’s Landscape Architect – The proposed planting is acceptable, however the landscape proposals identify three items that need attention;

- loss of existing lime trees – the proposed site plan and arboricultural method statement shows the retention of the two mature lime trees, however the landscaping proposals show these as being removed and replaced. The lime trees should be retained.

- fencing – solid and high form of fencing is inappropriate in this location; it should be replaced with something lower and more open such as 1500mm high hit-and-miss or timber palisade.  I suggest therefore that the refences to fencing type are removed from the landscape plan, since this would be a covered by a separate condition along with the fencing details.

- Cherry – the proposed cycle store would result in the removal of Cherry T314. This should be removed or shown as a dashed line on the landscape plan.

 

Officer response: The landscape proposals show works that are contrary to the agreed site plan and arboricultural method statement and would give rise to significant concerns regarding the potential loss of additional protected trees.  As such, the landscaping plans are not accepted as approved documents and officers recommend that condition 30, which requires a final detailed landscaping scheme to be submitted, is retained as per the committee report.  

 

Suggested Amendments to Conditions

 

The Applicant has submitted revised plans and additional information, which has been assessed by officers.  If Members are minded to grant planning permission, it is requested that the following conditions are updated to take these into account (additions in bold). 

 

2.       The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans and other submitted details:-

 

- DP(9)904 Rev N Proposed Site Plan RPA

- DP(0)001 Rev B Proposed GF Plan

- DP(0)002 Rev B Proposed FF Plan

- DP(0)003 Rev B Proposed SF Plan

- DP(0)050 Rev E Proposed Elevations

- Construction Emissions Management Plan & Construction Method Statement Prepared by L.Garton Yorkare Homes Dated 6th August 2023 (Submitted 13.12.2023)

- Demolition Method Statement YRK-43-10 Dated 30.04.2023 by UDCS Demolition ltd

- Tree Protection Plan - Undated/Un-numbered

- Site Logistics & Fire Plan Rev 1 Dated: Dec 23

- Flood Risk and Drainage Assessment JAG/AD/JR/48217-Rp001-Rev F September 2023 by Alan Wood & Partners

- Written Scheme of Investigation - Archaeological Evaluation by Trial Trenching & Topographical Survey Ref: 05.02.23 by MAP Archaeological Practice

- Archaeological Evaluation by Trail Trenching and Earthwork Survey Ref: 05-02-23 by MAP Archaeological Practice

- Phase 1 (Desk study) Report 1238/5952/P/P1 January 2023 by Humberside Materials Laboratory Ltd

- Phase 2 (Ground Investigation) report 1238/5952/P/P2 February 2023 by Humberside Materials Laboratory Ltd

- Ecological Appraisal December 2022 by Wold Ecology Ltd

- Construction Ecological Management Plan and Ecological Enhancement Management Plan (April 2023) by Wold Ecology Ltd

- Arboricultural Method Statement Ref: LTY01-22 MS (Dated 22 December 2022)

- Travel Plan October 2023 Rev B by Local Transport Projects

- Sustainable Design Alternatives Revision: Issue 1 Dated 8 November 2022 by Martin Design Associates Ltd

- Cricket and Rugby Ball Strike Assessment LSUK.23-0616_CBA Version 1.0 Dated 11.09.2023 by Labosport

- The provision of additional informal playing field area by Sports Field Design Ltd

 

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that the development is carried out only as approved by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Condition 13 is requested to be removed following confirmation that the archaeological evaluation and topographic survey is acceptable and the requirements of this condition have now been complied with.

 

13.     A programme of post-determination archaeological evaluation and topographic survey of earthworks is required. All works shall be undertaken in accordance with the submitted Written Scheme of Investigation - Archaeological Evaluation by Trial Trenching & Topographical Survey Ref: 05.02.23 by MAP Archaeological Practice.

 

Each stage shall be completed and agreed by the Local Planning Authority before it can be discharged/approved. 

 

A) The site investigation and post investigation assessment shall be completed in accordance with the programme set out in the approved Written Scheme of Investigation and the provision made for analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition will be secured. This part of the condition shall not be discharged until these elements have been fulfilled in accordance with the programme set out in the WSI.

 

B) A copy of a report and an assessment of the impact of the proposed development on any of the archaeological remains identified in the evaluation shall be deposited with City of York Historic Environment Record to allow public dissemination of results within 6 weeks of completion or such other period as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

 

C) Where archaeological features and deposits are identified proposals for the preservation in-situ, or for the investigation, recording and recovery of archaeological remains and the publishing of findings shall be submitted as an amendment to the original WSI. It should be understood that there shall be presumption in favour of preservation in-situ wherever feasible.

 

D) No development shall take place until:

- details in c have been approved and implemented on site

- provision has been made for analysis, dissemination of results and archive deposition has been secured

- a copy of a report on the archaeological works detailed in Part C should be deposited with City of York Historic Environment Record within 3 months of completion or such other period as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: The site lies within an area of archaeological interest. An investigation is required to identify the presence and significance of archaeological features and deposits and ensure that archaeological features and deposits are either recorded or, if of national importance, preserved in-situ. This is to comply with Section 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

The additional information has been assessed and the planning balance and the recommendation are unchanged from the published report.

 

 

Following debate, Cllr Whitcroft moved the officer recommendation to approve the application. The motion was seconded by Cllr Steward. On being put to a vote, with ten votes in favour and one against, it was:

 

 

Resolved:   That the application be approved following the Secretary  of State Decision.

 

Reasons:

1)   The application site is located within the general extent of the Green Belt and serves a number of Green Belt purposes.  National planning policy (para. 154 states that the construction of new buildings in the Green Belt should be regarded as inappropriate unless it falls within one of the exceptions to this outlined in paragraph 154g.  Further, the material change in the use of the northern part of the site for use as playing pitches by York Sports Club, outlined by paragraph 155 e, is not inappropriate.  However, the proposal fails to preserve the openness of the Green Belt and conflicts with the purposes of including land within the Green Belt specifically purposes A (checking unrestricted sprawl), C (safeguarding the countryside from encroachment) and D (preserving the setting and special character of historic towns) of para. 143 of the NPPF. 

 

2)   The proposal is considered to deliver significant benefits; it will provide a residential care home providing 60 bedrooms in total meeting an identified need across the city.  The care home will be split with 40 bedrooms offering dementia care with the remaining 20 bedrooms providing residential care.  The proposed building is designed to meet the requirements of all the prospective residents’ care needs.  The site is in an accessible and sustainable location, with access to public transport.  Other benefits of the proposal include the provision of playing pitches for use by York Sports Club to alleviate existing pressures on the main sports pitches (rugby union and cricket), and the provision of junior pitches would meet an identified need as set out in the York Active Playing Pitch Strategy (2014). These are given substantial weight. Other matters that are considered to be acceptable include design, highway and parking, ecology, residential amenity drainage and flood risk.  Moderate weight is applied to these matters.

 

3)   Weighed against these benefits are concerns about the loss of and potential risk to protected trees, although it is recognised that the proposed landscaping scheme provides a high level of replacement planting, and the amendments have been made to address these concerns.  Additionally, whilst there is some harm arising from the change in character of the northern part of the site as open space, the footpath will be retained, a recreational use, albeit in a different form of playing pitches, will be maintained ad it will generally retain an open setting.  The proposal will also provide a detailed programme of ecological enhancement measures. 

 

4)   Weighing up the planning balance, it is considered that the considerations set out in paragraphs 5.125 – 5.127 would collectively clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and the very special circumstances necessary to justify the proposed development exist.

 

5)   Approval is recommended subject to the referral of the application to the  Secretary of State under The Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2021(“the 2021 Direction”) and the application not being called in by the Secretary  of State for determination. The application is required to be referred to the Secretary of State as the development is considered to be inappropriate development in the Green Belt, and the proposed floorspace would be in excess of the 1000 sqm threshold set out in the 2021 Direction.